On 5/17/23 3:27 PM, Martin D Kealey wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 20:20, Oğuz İsmail Uysal <oguzismailuy...@gmail.com> wrote:On 5/16/23 8:35 PM, Aleksey Covacevice wrote: [original code elided as it's been mangled by line-wrapping] This boils down to the following true & false & wait -n With respect, I disagree with that statement of equivalence.The only way for the loop to terminate is when `wait` returns 127, after both children have been reaped. By when the non-zero exit status of "false" will have been noted, and then used as the return value of the function.
Must have misread then, thanks
